Hi everyone,

I'm really struggling with parallel, parallel flaw, and weakening arguments. It started out as my strongest areas but has plummeted as I am actually trying to figure out the methods and not base it on intuition. Doesn't nearly every single argument have a flaw? Like with an analogy I can always just say "relationship between X and Y isn't similar enough to Y and Z to be compared". It's just so frustrating that the test makers are setting the parameters for whether I'm looking for a flaw or saying some absolutely bizarre, nonsensical, but technically sound (?) argument is actually one that I'm looking for a parallel for. Thank you so much for taking the time to help!

Is anyone in the DC/DMV area taking the lsat before the logic games get removed that still needs to do fool proofing?

I printed out all the logic games from 1-35 with the intent of fool proofing but I didn’t get to it and now I’m gonna take the lsat post logic games so don’t need it. Would love for it to go to someone instead of just tossing it! DM me if you want it!

Prep Test 17 Section 4 Passage 3 #16

Could someone help me with why D is not the correct answer?

In the second paragraph, it gives the stats for carbon taxes and says "It should be noted, however, that these numbers ignore the effect of the tax on economic growth, and hence on emissions". Doesn't that imply that the taxes need to account for the effect on economic growth, and are thus influenced by it and would vary based on the effect that the tax would have on a country's economy (D)?

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

I was between D and E, and ended up choosing E. I can see why D is correct, but why is E wrong? I thought "directive" used in this context could be used as compelling the society to unite whereas "guiding" seemed a bit weak in comparison.

Can someone elaborate on this please?

Hi,

Do any of you have tips for staying motivated with prepping after getting questions like the ones for the Weakening question drill sets in the Core Curriculum wrong? I always write down why the correct answer choice is right and why I got it wrong, but I keep missing the level four questions.

Eric

If we already have a ProctorU account, do we have to use the login credentials that LSAC emailed us with? I already registered for a time slot with the account I already made. Thanks!

I just want to make sure I’m thinking about this right. I did a game where one rule said if H is in, G is not. And another rule said if J is not in, S is in. So when diagramming, if the slash is through the right variable (necessary condition) it’s always true that both can be out but both can’t be in. If the slash is through the left (sufficient condition) it’s always true that both can be in but both can’t be out (at least one must be in). Right? I tend to make reversal mistakes so I’m trying to make sure I fully understand.

Bee -> sting once

Sting once

—————

Bee

A-> B

B

—————

A

A) Spring -> Sneeze nonstop

Sneeze

——————

Spring

C) Old + brittle -> move with care

/Move with care -> /Old + brittle

Negation: Old + brittle -> Move w care (still valid argument whereas the stimulus is invalid).

D) Only is G2

Ruin roof -> more thunderstorm

/Ruin roof -> /more thunderstorm

Hi everyone! I will be taking the October test as my second attempt, and while I know things are pretty set in stone at this point, I was wondering if there were any last minute quick strategies people had to share? My LR has been hovering around the -6/-8 range for tests in the 80s and I would love to get that down to -5!

Hi everyone! I’m hoping to get some unbiased advice on what you guys think is the best option in my situation.

Long story short I have been at this for a while. I have already tested two times (I cancelled my first score as a first time test taker) and was not impressed with my score. I relied heavily on LG and LR because I was terrible in RC. This is the mindset I had with the first two tests I took so it didn’t go well for me.

After realizing I would need to test again, I started with a new tutor for RC about a month ago and it has helped a ton so far. She has a method that is different from any other method I have learned where it’s more of a strategical/step by step approach. It’s different from what people typically tutor in RC, but nonetheless, very helpful so far. The only issue i’m having is the method either isn’t very consistent (I notice some passages I go -4 or less… other passages -10 plus) or i’m not comfortable with it yet. My tutor says that this is a foolproof way to get up there in the highway percentile of test takers…but it takes a couple of months to perfect it. I don’t think i’m terrible, however, definitely not scoring consistently where I would need to be to not heavily rely on the other two sections (sometimes… other times i’m fine so it’s hard to say)

I scheduled my test for June and it’s the last chance I have to go to law school in the fall so I really want to give it a shot but i’m worried about having so many tests on my record. What are the odds of me improving with this method in the last week? Should I take the test? If I do have to test again in August will having 4 tests look really bad for me? I’ve always heard admission only looks at the highest score but i’m worried having 4 will look awful for me.

THANK YOU

Ok so pretty much X 50 ppl

Y has 100 ppl

X 1 person hospitalized

Y has 4 ppl hospitalized

So initially I thought this doesn't really seem like a paradox but wtv, lets just explain why Y has more hospital patients.

A. Ok if preventive health programs are more common X than in Y that'll explain why Y has more people in hospitals.

B. (I was between this and D just because I couldn't eliminate D) This actually explains the phenomena though. If city X is a leader in outpatient treatment whenever possible that explains why they have less hospitalizations they just send everyone home.

C. Perfect the drinking water of Y has DANGEROUSLY high toxins compared to that of X so that could cause more people to be sick and end up in hospitals

D*: (Read carefully) The hospitals in Y are of high quality and X ppl are sent there for treatment. Ok just because X people are sent there let's say to get the pain medication that wouldn't explain why Y has more hospital patients. They could just go get the medication and leave.

E. Fair assumption to make that if stress is correlated with higher hospitalizations

I chose C but I can see why it is A now. The premise is that there are these two cars which have different uses and weights. And we also learn that lighter cars are more fuel efficient. Therefore when the conclusion says "Since most automobile traffic is local... net saving in fuel blah blah blah. We need to fill the gap of "so most people must be using the lighter car when driving downtown. Therefore for A, which tells us that most families that drive long distances have two cars, that is the assumption we need which is that even people who have cars that drive long distances also have downtown lighter cars for local traffic.

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

I took my diagnostic test recently, my test score was pretty mediocre. I feel confident in my LR sections, this is my strength. I always enjoyed this section and I am pretty consistent in getting these right. However, I tanked in the LG and RC section. I ran out of time in RC and that's were most of my missed questions came from. In the LG section, I read them all, but could not make sense of how to diagram or where to start.

I am aiming for the LSAT in October, but will probably take the Aug. test depending. I know I can score in my target range, but I really need to get the LG / RC sections up if I am to do so.

My question is, should I skip to LG / RC sections in the 7sage curriculum and focus on building these skills up? Or continue to work through the curriculum in order as listed? Does the material build on and I will be missing the fundamentals to LG or would it be okay to skip around and target my weak areas?

Any advise would be appreciated. Thanks!

I was wondering how I should attack/understand this question?

It asks if it discusses the relationship between the reliability and one of the AC's. What does relationship mean in this case? Is the question asking if the passage mentions some sort of a connection between the reliability and one of the answer choices?

Thank you.

Hi! I'm taking the LSAT on Monday. My RC has always fluctuated, and I am hoping to practice with a really difficult section to make sure I'm ready for a worst-case scenario. Does anyone know of any particular RC sections that are science- and law-heavy and/or just have a lot of hard-to-spot inference questions? Thanks so much, and if you're taking October too, you got this!! <3

Hi,

Since this has no video explanation for it, I want to know whether I fell in line with the rest when I reached that conclusion. In this question, the author argues that butter manufacturers should be allowed to call their products "Can't believe it's not butter or Skim fat butter" to ward off any negative nuances from the term "Imitation butter". This person cites two reasons to back up one's allegation. A) People should be fostered to consume more low fat butter products because of their health concerns, arising from a high cholesterol level. B) This hostile naming like Knock-off/Ersatz could stave potential consumers off from those well-intentioned products owing to their aversion to the names. In that way, the industry could push people to indulge in more butterfat which could pose a threat to their health (esp. cardiovascular). In order to weaken this assertion, I thought it would be better off for me to claim that this aversion could beget more positive results healthwise for those buyers in the market. What if they, finding those suggestive names unbearably repulsive, decided to find the authentic low fat butter products which significantly slashed the fat content? For instance, they would rather find a real McCoy low fat butter, projecting an image of authenticity,instead of phonier butter substitutes, which happened to have less butterfat in it? People who voted for Trump would rather turn to him to gratify their desires, whatever they might be, in lieu of settling down for his miniature, Ron DeSantis, emulating his extreme creeds. I just thought that it was important for me to tackle the author's point that the negative naming could take a toll on public health because it deters people from purchasing the imitation butter which is healthier for them thanks to the low fat content in comparison with the regular ones. Thus, one of the ramifications was supposed to bear the unexpected consequence that made everyone more robust and hale: cutting off the consumption of butterfat more noticeably than what was expected from the fake butter. What are your thoughts on this? I would like to hear from other would-be legal minds. Thanks!

Hi all,

I've been struggling to wrap my head around this question (i'll post below). Can anyone explain this?

"It must be true that the lowest-numbered line on which" changes to "no lower than line". . . Why is it not that F can be lines 2 or 1?

It must be true that the lowest-numbered line on which

(A) F can be assembled is line 2

(B) G can be assembled is line 3

(C) J can be assembled is line 2

(D) K can be assembled is line 3

(E) M can be assembled is line 2

(A): Does it have to be true that F can be no lower than line 2? In other words, could F be 1st?

F could be lower than line 2! We have no rules stopping F from being 1st, and for completion’s sake—though you probably wouldn’t do this on Test Day—we’ll give you an example. F could be 1st, for example if the order were: FMGSJKH. Although there are several other possible scenarios in which F can be 1st, finding just one is sufficient to determine that this choice’s statement “could be false.”

LR- PTB.S1.Q1

Misread the question and u was stuck between two answer choices that I thought would be correct. I need to understand the main point for this question because it can lead to tricky answer choices.

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

Hey guys, please help

I have been looking for a LR question that I did (I have impression because I spent 3 mins on it during blind review and it is pretty tough) but I couldn't find it even after I have gone through the entire question bank. I remember starring the explanation, but when I looked again it is just not there. I am getting super super confused right now.

Here are my clues: It is either PMR or parallel flaw, and I think less than 50% people got it right. I don't remember what the stimulus is, but the the correct answer choice is C and it has to do with something like city figure and crime rate.

JY also excliplitly stated that we should skip this question and not waste time on it during real test because it is extremely time-consuming.

Anyone has an idea?

Thanks!

hi! (fair warning, this a question from is the genuinely tragic mirrors passage btw): for the life of me, i cannot figure out why c is the right choice for this one. i think it's largely because i literally just don't understand what the answer choice means. like genuinely word-wise.

i get that the idea of "separating observers from scientific phenomenon" as it's discussed in the text + how this informs the tendency of scientists to prefer certain explanations for phenomena. but i don't understand how that idea is conveyed by answer choice c. answer c reads: "One explanation of what mirrors do reveals the traditional tendency of physicists to separate a phenomenon to be explained from the observer of a phenomenon."

i've been racking my head trying to parse the bolded part word-by-word but i genuinely can't figure it out. isn't the point the text is making that science ppl prefer explanations that don't rely on the observer? how does "separating a phenomenon •••to be explained••• from the observer of a phenomenon" do that?? if someone could even just help break down what this part means that would be useful lol. ty in advance (3(/p)

JY says in the prep test explanation video there is a seperate video on 7sage to watch where all possible worlds are solved. Where can I find his video?

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question”

I get most of my LSAT LR drills correct (usually except for the hardest difficulty) and I find myself overthinking those really hard questions because I am trying to practice a methodology and skill instead of relying on my intuition, that gets the easier/medium/hard questions right. I'm just wondering what my approach should be.

Hi everyone,

I am late to the game and I am using this summer to tackle studying for the LSAT, and taking the August exam.

I know this is an overly ambitious plan of attack but sadly I do not have many other options.

That being said, does anyone have any tips or advice on how I should approach this?? I am not sure if I am better off trying to complete all of the foundational material and lessons, or skipping around or what.

I do not have enough time to complete all 900+ hours of the program before August, so that being said any suggestions are greatly appreciated.

As of now, I am getting through the foundations and then going to begin incorporating the practice tests and such starting mid June, and then from there out switch between the foundation and practice. Not sure if this is the best approach though.

Thank you ! And Goodluck to everyone !

I got this wrong initially by marking down A but the correct answer is E. This stimulus tells us a few things

It can be hard to tell whether adults can be held morally responsible for the treatment they receive because its hard to know if that is on their control or not.

Sometimes people's actions are the inevitable consequences of the treatment they received when they were an infant (and since infants can't control anything they can't be morally responsible for receiving that treatment).

What absolutely MUST be true here?

A. an infant's actions are not on the chopping block here + never is really strong language

B. maybe this is true but it feels really tangential

C. this concept of partial responsibility does not exist anywhere in the stimulus we are operating in a binary universe

D. we know that the statement (people cannot be morally responsible for things they can't control and the inevitable consequences of things they can't control) is true but this offers a false contraposition of that statement (suff - neck confusion)

E. If everyone sometimes performs acts for which they are not morally responsible, that means that no-one should be held morally responsible for every act one performs.

Admin Note: Edited title. For LR questions, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."

I need a detailed explanation. thank you

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question”